2002 (10) TMI 560

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... for the Respondent. [Order per : C.N.B. Nair, Member (T)]. The issue raised in this appeal is the eligibility of the appellants for small scale exemption under Notifications No. 175/86 and 1/93 in view of the use of the trade name/brand name Lovejoy on their products. It is not in dispute that manufacturers affixing the brand name of another person on their products are excluded from .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... out that the registration by the appropriate authority sets at rest all doubts about the ownership of the brand name in India. The appellant also pointed out that the foreign company themselves have raised no claim regarding their ownership of this brand name in respect of India. In fact, the impugned order itself had noted this position in Paragraph 6.1 where in it has been observed that the tra .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e case. During the hearing of the case, the learned Counsel also pointed out that this legal position laid down by the Calcutta High Court was followed by the Tribunal in the case of Convertech Equipment Pvt. Ltd. v. CCE, Meerut, 2001 (137) E.L.T. 144, Rajdoot Paints Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, New Delhi, 2001 (134) E.L.T. 281 etc. 3. A perusal of the records of the case makes it clear .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X